No AAD, No Jump

[pilotdave 0]

I agree with anyone that says not to do more dangerous jumps just because you have a cypres. But Bill goes way beyond saying that. It sounds to me like he's saying that jumpers have something to prove by making a single jump with no cypres. I don't think that proves a thing. Odds are, on my next jump, I won't need my cypres, pretty much no matter what I plan to do. So does making that one jump without a cypres prove anything about me? I wear a cypres on every jump because on some random jump, when I least expect it, I might just need it. Knowing that on some random jump they might lose altitude awareness or get knocked out, a lot of people choose to ALWAYS use a cypres. I simply can't see how that is bad.

Now I think Bill's point is that when we jump with no cypres, maybe we'll be more altitude aware and not take as many chances. I agree that we should be just as altitude aware and not take those chances even if we have a cypres. But I don't agree that a single cypresless jump proves a thing about anyone or makes them a better skydiver in any way.

I see the point about jumping with no altimeter, or the altimeter covered. I wish he'd caveat that with the recommended experience level to start pulling without looking at an altimeter, since I don't really need a bunch of people pulling at 7k by mistake when I'm above them. But I don't see a parallel to the cypres. Jumping without a cypres isnt a skill, it's simply an extra risk (at least in some peoples' view).

Dave

[jumpndoc 0]

Quote

But I don't see a parallel to the cypres. Jumping without a cypres isnt a skill, it's simply an extra risk (at least in some peoples' view).

Bingo! Well put.

Bill and Ron have lost their credibility in my eyes because of their dogma. They both have very good points in this thread but cloud them with pre-AAD dogma. Yes, all experienced jumpers (how do you define that?) should be as safe on every jump wheather they use an altimeter, ditter, pro-track, helmet, AAD, or any other device that IMPROVES safety. Using these devices does NOT make one less safe or competent or even dependent, simply wiser. We should all be doing all we can to prevent increased risk in an already risky venture.

That includes the training and practice advised by Ron and Bill; the smart thinking BEFORE buying the reserve that can't land one relatively safely with stowed brakes and unconscious; the use of amazing technology designed specifically to help reduce risk; competent, deliberate progression in canopy handling (and buying); NOT jumping when you don't feel good, or are not sure of the safety of a specific jump or jump conditions; and of course, as Andy stated, wearing your seat belt to and from the drop zone.

If a business owner wants to do this or that and the market will bear it, then more power to him. If a jumper wants to jump with or without an AAD, then more power to her. If the business owner's (DZO's) decision to have certain rules conflicts with the consumer's choice to use or not use certain devices conflict then the consumer can take their business else where, where the conflict does not exist.

Isn't the USA a great country?!

[cruzit 0]

Quote

That includes the training and practice advised by Ron and Bill; the smart thinking BEFORE buying the reserve that can't land one relatively safely with stowed brakes and unconscious; the use of amazing technology designed specifically to help reduce risk; competent, deliberate progression in canopy handling (and buying); NOT jumping when you don't feel good, or are not sure of the safety of a specific jump or jump conditions; and of course, as Andy stated, wearing your seat belt to and from the drop zone.

Exactly.

I jumped for 6 years without an AAD. However, when I could afford one, I bought it. Why, because at least once in my skydiving career, I have lost altitude awareness. And once I was hit so hard in the face with an altimeter, I was knocked semi-conscious on exit. Does this make me a bad skydiver, I don't think so...it makes me human. I am willing to admit, I or someone I'm jumping with, may screw up badly enough to warrant an AAD save.

I have nothing to prove by jumping without an AAD. Stating that new jumpers (or any jumper for that matter) should be prepared to jump without one is a good statement. As I have advised to many FJC students, every piece of jumping equipment you possess is mechanical...and any mechanical device is prone to failure at some point. Therefore, assume your safety equipment won't work and prepare to take care of any emergency yourself. But don't not wear an AAD to prove a point...because it may be the last thing you do.

I understand the logic expressed that some jumpers may feel they can act more recklessly if they have an AAD. While this may be true, it is also true that a portion of any group will be more aggressive and reckless in their actions. These are the same jumpers who downsize to rapidly, hook turn indiscriminately and generally act recklessly in every aspect of their life.

Okay...off my soapbox.

[billvon 2,396]

> They both have very good points in this thread but cloud them with pre-AAD dogma.

Pre-AAD dogma? I started well after the first AAD was used; I even started after the first Cypres was sold. Skydiver incompetence and error was the single biggest killer back then, and it's the single biggest killer now, despite AAD's, dytters, ZP canopies, skyhooks etc.

>Yes, all experienced jumpers (how do you define that?) should be as
> safe on every jump wheather they use an altimeter, ditter, pro-
>track, helmet, AAD, or any other device that IMPROVES safety. >Using these devices does NOT make one less safe or competent
>or even dependent, simply wiser.

In some cases, yes. In some cases, no. In one case a jumper used an AAD because (as he confessed to his friends) he didn't know if he could handle himself in a malfunction. The AAD gave him the confidence to jump anyway.

One day he had to bail out at 1000 feet. His cypres hadn't armed. He pulled all the wrong handles and died. His cypres, far from helping him survive, helped contribute to his death because he depended on it rather than realistically judging his own capabilities.

Do other people do that, either unconsciously or consciously? Wendy Faulkner, a very experienced world record holder, admitted that it happened to her. I don't know how to prove if someone has that problem, but I know how to prove that they don't - and that's to ask them if they are willing to make even a single jump without a cypres. If the answer is yes, under certain conditions, then no problem. If the answer is absolutely not, they _may_ have a dependency. How do you know for sure? You can't; even Wendy didn't know, and she has a lot more experience than most people here.

>We should all be doing all we can to prevent increased risk in an already risky venture.

Yes. And sometimes that means INCREASING the risk for a short time. That might mean intentionally going unstable during AFF to prove you can recover, or landing crosswind instead of into the wind so you can learn to do that, or jumping with your altimeter covered over so you can see if you can judge altitude. That doesn't decrease risk on that jump, but it makes you a better skydiver on your next 1000.

Want to do all you can to decrease your risk on each jump? Never do RW. Never jump anything other than a Manta. Never go above 5000 feet. (Hypoxia might strike!) Or learn to manage those risks, by taking more for a short time and becoming good at RW, or HP canopy flight, thereby decreasing your risks in the long term.

[burbleflyer 0]

Quote

Quote

I see that as apples and oranges

Well I see it this way...More skydivers die from bad moves under canopies than get knocked out.

More jumpers die from high wingloads than no pulls.

So I find it funny that a guy will say he will not jump without an AAD, but will load up a canopy.

He is more likley to die from the canopy.

So I find it funny...You don't have to agree...Its called humor.

Not everyone likes Knock-knock jokes.

I like irony.

And the folks that jump a high wingload but scream that jumping without an AAD is dangerous..Well that is ironic.

I dont want some guy sitting at a computer in Germany deciding when to pull my reserve.
I'll do that on my own thank you.

[piisfish 135]

Quote

So I find it funny that a guy will say he will not jump without an AAD, but will load up a canopy.

He is more likley to die from the canopy.

more skydivers survive from an open high loaded canopy landing than from a closed lightly loaded canopy

Quote

So I find it funny...You don't have to agree...Its called humor.

scissors beat paper, paper beat rock, rock beat wingsuit - KarlM

[AndyMan 7]

Quote

>Likewise, I have jumped without a Cypres. It was a solo hop and pop from 6K.

Good for you! You've demonstrated that you don't rely on the thing.

So... because I've done a single jump without one, I don't rely on it, but if I hadn't done that single jump I do? I'm a safer skydiver because I've done a single jump? I don't think so.

It sounds like it is a right of passage. That's not healthy.

_Am

__

You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

[billvon 2,396]

>So... because I've done a single jump without one, I don't rely on it,
> but if I hadn't done that single jump I do?

Because you were willing to do that single jump, you have shown you don't rely on it.

>I'm a safer skydiver because I've done a single jump? I don't think so.

I think so. A jumper is safer once he is able to do even a single jump from 3500 feet. A jumper unable to do even one because of fears of getting stable etc is going to have a problem if he ever has to bail out. There is value in actually doing things.

>It sounds like it is a right of passage. That's not healthy.

?? There are lots of rites of passage in skydiving, from the first jump to the first release dive to the first solo to the first RW etc. Not sure if they are "healthy" or not - they just are, and you learn from them.

[Harksaw 0]

Whats the difference between jumping without the cypres to prove you don't need it, and jumping with the cypres, but pulling on your own anyway? (Which most people do...) To me, you've proven the same thing either way.

Can't we all agree that theres nothing inherently wrong with insisting on a Cypres as long as you never give up on pulling and expect it to work? You can have that mindset and still insist on an AAD.

__________________________________________________
I started skydiving for the money and the chicks. Oh, wait.

[PhreeZone 15]

Here is a simple question to see if you are depending on the Cypres or not. Would you not get on a skydive if your Cypres was not working that you would if the Cypres was working correctly?

Yesterday is history
And tomorrow is a mystery

Parachutemanuals.com

[elfanie 0]

Quote

Here is a simple question to see if you are depending on the Cypres or not. Would you not get on a skydive if your Cypres was not working that you would if the Cypres was working correctly?

Even that doesn't have a simple answer for me...

If I started jumping before the Cypres was invented, I probably would have jumped without a cypres. However, knowing that they are an option, an added level of safety, I wouldn't jump without one now....

why? Not because I want to do crazier things and therefore want a cypres....but because since it is an option, I see no benefit to NOT having one, and many benefits to having one. I'm trying to increase my safety - not increase the level of stupid things I can do.

Until my cypres was installed in my new rig...I jumped rentals. (with a cypres) Why increase my risk unnecessarily? that's what doesn't make sense to me...
if there is even a .00005 % chance that I could be knocked unconscious and still be alive because my cypres kicked, then why NOT have one?

I just don't understand the benefit of forgoing anything that makes this sport safer...

--------------------------------------------
Elfanie
My Skydiving Page
Fly Safe - Soft Landings

[Harksaw 0]

Quote

Here is a simple question to see if you are depending on the Cypres or not. Would you not get on a skydive if your Cypres was not working that you would if the Cypres was working correctly?

Thats a good, reasonable way of looking at it, and if anyone answers yes, they should get themselves straightened out ASAP.

But there are some people that would not get on *any* skydive without a cypres, regardless of what kind of jump it is, and I don't see whats inherently wrong with that thinking.

Edit: Now that I re-read, the people in my second paragraph do fit in the "dependent" category in your question, but as long as they will never give up on pulling, I don't see what the problem is.

__________________________________________________
I started skydiving for the money and the chicks. Oh, wait.

[cruzit 0]

It's all about what an acceptable level of risk is for you as an individual. While I may be alright with making a jump without a Cypres, I like having that extra measure of safety to offset my margin of error.

I'm with Elfanie, having the Cypres doesn't personally make it acceptable for me to jump on zoo loads or practice any other high risk freefall stuff anymore than my wearing a seatbelt in my car makes me think I can drive 130 mph on the freeway.

As I said before, if you are inclined to participate in high(er) risk activities then maybe you need to rethink.

[billvon 2,396]

>Whats the difference between jumping without the cypres to prove
> you don't need it, and jumping with the cypres, but pulling on your
> own anyway?

Same thing you learn/prove/show by flying an airplane yourself vs having an instructor on board even if you do everything yourself. There's no difference in what you do, but there is a difference in the perceived environment.

>Can't we all agree that theres nothing inherently wrong with insisting
> on a Cypres as long as you never give up on pulling and expect it to
> work?

Surely, if you insist on it, it's because you expect it to work. Otherwise there would be no reason to insist on it. People do not need cypreses because they give up on pulling, they need them because they forget to pull - and a cypres might just give you that extra bit confidence you need so you don't worry incessantly about pulling all the time.

[Ron 7]

Quote

Jumping without a cypres isnt a skill, it's simply an extra risk (at least in some peoples' view).

#1 its not an EXTRA risk. It is just not extra saftey added.

And thats kinda the whole point right there.

It is not EXTRA risk to jump without a CYPRES.

It is extra risk to have it and do things you would not do without it.

Its about the mindset. Both Bill and I have them...But they are truely backups to a well trained and planned dive. We have both assesed our risk levels and made choices other than to wear a CYPRES or not. Bill just came back from the 350+way....I would not go. For me it is to risky with or without a CYPRES...Since I would not do it without a CYPRES...I would not do them with one.

They are back ups.....And only back ups...So that the muther of all fuckups does not kill us. But we don't use them as a ticket to do dumb things....Or to do things that we are scared to do.

We train to be current. Train to be competent.

Then ADD the extra saftey of a CYPRES...Its an after thought to an already well planned and trained jump.

To some it is the first thing they think about. For us its the last.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[pilotdave 0]

Quote

#1 its not an EXTRA risk. It is just not extra saftey added.

I see no difference. Is it not an extra risk to drive with no seatbelt, or use powertools without safety glasses, or skydive without a helmet? They are all quite possible, and can be done with no injury. But it is safer, and therefore less risky, to use those safety devices. By choosing not to use them, you are taking an extra risk. And in the case of a cypres, I always add "at least in the views of some people," since many believe the cypres ADDS risk.

Other than that, I completely agree with you. I am disagreeing with Bill's assertion that a single cypresless jump makes a person a better skydiver, or a person that chooses to use a cypres on every single jump is an inferior skydiver. I'm not saying there aren't any people that do completely depend on their cypres and probably shouldn't be jumping in the first place. I'm saying that by choosing to always use a cypres, it doesn't make a person dependent on the device. It's a choice, not a dependence, for many people.

Dave

[billvon 2,396]

>I am disagreeing with Bill's assertion that a single cypresless jump
>makes a person a better skydiver . . .

I never said it did, just as a pilot's first solo does not make him a better pilot and a skydiver's first low jump does not make him a better jumper. All it does is prove a pilot can solo an airplane and a jumper can exit from a low altitude - and there is value in those things, even though they are both more dangerous and do not make you a better skydiver/pilot.

> I'm saying that by choosing to always use a cypres, it doesn't make
> a person dependent on the device. It's a choice, not a dependence,
>for many people.

I agree. So how do you tell the two apart? How do you tell someone who is dependent on it from someone who just uses it as a backup to their own sufficient skill? One way to do that is to see if they will ever, under any conditions, jump without one. If they will, they are not dependent on it. If they refuse, they _may_ be.

[AndyMan 7]

You said I was a safer skydiver because I've done one jump without a Cypres. You'll have to forgive us for not seeing a terribly big gap between being "safer" and being "better".

As for wether someone is dependent on it or not, the only test I can see is to have someone intentionally not pull. That's the only case I can see someone truely be dependent on a Cypres.... To not pull.

_Am

__

You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

[billvon 2,396]

>You said I was a safer skydiver because I've done one jump without a Cypres.

You have proved you're not dependent on a cypres.

Who's safer, a pilot who has landed dead-stick or a pilot who thinks he can but has never done it? Both _might_ have exactly the same level of skill (in other words, neither 100% dependent on their engine.) One has proven he can.

[Harksaw 0]

The difference I see between the cypres and pilot analogies, is that you can go your entire skydiving career and never have to jump without a Cypres, so why not always have it? You can't really be a pilot if you always need a guy watching you.

I see no problem with being "dependent" on a Cypres, (meaning you won't jump without it), the only danger I see is when you behave differently, getting on more dangerous jumps, with the consideration that you might not pull.

Quote

So how do you tell the two apart? How do you tell someone who is dependent on it from someone who just uses it as a backup to their own sufficient skill? One way to do that is to see if they will ever, under any conditions, jump without one. If they will, they are not dependent on it. If they refuse, they _may_ be.

They may be, yes. They also may not be, and just see no benefit and only added danger to jumping without it.

__________________________________________________
I started skydiving for the money and the chicks. Oh, wait.

[billvon 2,396]

>You can't really be a pilot if you always need a guy watching you.

And for skydivers there's a problem if you always need someone or something else that can pull for you (IMO.) BTW, most ATP's never fly solo in their jobs, but I think it's important that they have demonstrated that they can at one point in their flying career.

[beowulf 1]

The thought that jumps out to me in this whole discussion is that jumping with out an AAD at least once is a psychological improvement rather then tangible safety improvement

[pilotdave 0]

Psychological for who? The jumper, or Bill? (j/k)

Dave

[burbleflyer 0]

If you want to make AADs mandatory then I propose another rule: If your AAD saves your life and you are not unconsious then hand in your licence and go home. You should, after all, already be dead and should be just happy that you're alive. Right?
Have an appeal process if you like.
After all, make a big enough mistake in a car and you can lose your licence.
I think its a fair rule.

[Harksaw 0]

where did anyone ever support making AADs mandatory? We just don't think you're necessarily less a safe skydiver if you insist on always jumping with one.

Your idea sounds like a good concept though.

__________________________________________________
I started skydiving for the money and the chicks. Oh, wait.